* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment reserved on: October 05, 2009
Judgment delivered on : November 03, 2009
+ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 218/1994
KULWANT SINGH ALIAS BITTOO ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. A.J.Bhambhani,
Advocate with Ms. Nisha
Bhambhani, Advocate
Versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Sunil Sharma,Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BHARIHOKE
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest ? Yes
AJIT BHARIHOKE, J.
1. The appellant having been convicted in the Sessions Case No.76/94 emanating from FIR No.277/92, P.S. Tilak Nagar for an offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced in terms of order dated 09.08.1994 to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5000/- Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 1 of 19 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo RI for a period of one and a half year, has preferred the instant appeal.
2. The facts in brief are that the appellant and Ms. Rani (hereinafter called „deceased‟) were members of a dance group. The appellant had an infatuation with the deceased and wanted to marry her. His proposal for marriage was declined by Ms. Rani. On 17.05.92 at about 5.00 PM, appellant Kulwant Singh @ Bittoo called Ms. Rani to his House No.WZ-112, Sant Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi on the pretext of discussing an offer for a dance programme. There at his house, appellant threatened her saying that either she should consent to marry him or he would finish her. When she declined the offer, appellant poured acid upon her body and face with a bottle, and fled away after having bolted the door of the room from outside. It is further the case of the prosecution that in the process, the appellant also sustained acid burn injuries and he went away from the spot of occurrence in three-wheeler scooter of PW8 Kashmir Singh who noticed acid burns on his hands and on his enquiry, the appellant told him that he had to go to a Doctor. The appellant is stated to have alighted from the scooter at Khayala. PW7 Subhash and PW16 Surender Kumar are stated to have heard the shrieks of appellant deceased, so they reached at the spot of occurrence and on seeing the door of the room of the appellant locked they broke the „kunda‟ of the door and rescued Rani who had suffered acid burns.
Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 2 of 19
3. It is further the case of prosecution that someone rang up Police Control Room and informed that a girl had been confined in a room of House No.WZ-112, Sant Nagar, after pouring acid on her. The information was conveyed to the Police Station Tilak Nagar and was recorded in the Daily Diary as DD No.39-B dated 17.05.1992 (Ex.PW13/A). SI Babu Ram, PW22 was entrusted to verify the DD report, who visited the said house along with Constable Atma Ram. He found the injured Rani present outside the aforesaid house with acid burns all over her body. He immediately sent Rani to DDU Hospital along with Constable Atma Ram. On enquiry at the spot, he came to know that public persons had rescued the girl from the room by breaking the lock and kunda of the door. SI Nawab Singh also reached at the spot. He left SI Nawab Singh there to protect the scene of crime and went to DDU Hospital. Dr. J.K. Tyagi, who had examined injured Rani, declared her fit for making statement and appended his endorsement to that effect on the MLC of Rani at about 6.30 PM. SI Babu Ram thereafter recorded the statement of injured Rani in presence of Dr. A.K. Seth, wherein she stated thus:
"I reside at the abovenoted address and I am a Dancer. Bittoo, a resident of WZ-112, Sant Nagar also performs dances with me as a Dancer. For some time Bittoo was proposing himself to me for marriage. But I did not like Bittoo because of his habits. Otherwise also he was not of my Biradari. My family members were also against this marriage with Bittoo. But Bittoo had earlier also threatened me a number of times that I should marry with him otherwise he will not leave me in a position to marry with anyone. Today at about 5.00 p.m. Bittoo called me at his house no.WZ- 112, Sant Nagar saying that there is an offer for a dance programme today. After calling me at his house, Bittoo threatened me that either I should give my consent to marry him or he would finish me that day. When I Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 3 of 19 declined his offer of marriage, Bittoo in order to kill me poured acid on my entire body and face. Thereafter he having bolted the door of that room from outside fled away from there. Legal action may be taken."
4. It is further the case of prosecution that SI Babu Ram sent said statement of the injured along with his endorsement to the Police Station for registration of the case and on the basis of said statement formal FIR No.277/92 was registered under Section 307 IPC at Police Station Tilak Nagar. It is also the case of prosecution that on inspection of spot of occurrence, SI Babu Ram found a bottle containing some black liquid Ex.P-12, a bed sheet burnt with acid Ex.P-13 and ashes of cloth Ex.P-14. Besides, he also found a lock make Nelson Ex.P- 15 and a broken kunda Ex.P-16. All those articles were converted into separate sealed packets and taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW22/D.
5. The appellant surrendered in the court of Ms. Rekha Rani, MM and he was formally arrested by the Investigating Officer. On interrogation, the appellant made a disclosure statement and pursuant to that he led the police party to the house of one Gurcharan Singh at Khayala and got recovered the T-Shirt Ex.P-10 which he was wearing at the time of occurrence. The T-Shirt was having acid burn stains and it was taken into possession vide Memo Ex.PW4/B. The appellant also led the police party to the house of his uncle Dalip Singh, PW 11 at Baljeet Nagar and from there, he got recovered the pant Ex.P-11 having acid stains, which was also taken into possession vide Memo Ex.PW4/C. It is Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 4 of 19 further the case of prosecution that the accused also led the police party to Old Market, Tilak Nagar and pointed out the shop of PW 25 Inderjit Singh from where he had bought the acid bottle.
6. The Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the witnesses, arranged for sending of the Exhibits seized during investigation to the CFSL for examination and obtained the report of CFSL. On completion of investigation, challan under Section 302 IPC was filed against the appellant as Rani had expired in RML Hospital on 18.05.1992, and as per the post mortem report, cause of her death was because of shock from corrosive burns, as opined by Dr. L.T. Ramani, PW5.
7. The appellant was charged under Section 302 IPC for having committed murder of the deceased Rani. Appellant pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried.
8. On completion of trial, the learned trial Judge found the appellant guilty for offence of culpable homicide amounting to murder of the deceased Rani and convicted him under Section 302 IPC and passed consequent order on sentence.
9. The case of the prosecution rests mainly on the dying declaration Ex.PW22/A of the deceased made in presence of SI Babu Ram, PW22 and Dr. Alok Seth, PW23, which also formed basis for the registration of FIR.
Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 5 of 19
10. Before adverting to the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, it would be relevant to note that the appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. took the defence that he has been falsely implicated. According to him, he wanted to marry the deceased, but she was not inclined. The deceased had got a break to work in a movie "Pyar Ki Pyas". He had seen her posing for nude posters and the deceased was afraid that he may not disclose her secrets, which may mar her chances to work in the movies. Therefore, with a view to get rid of him, the deceased tried to throw acid on him and when in order to save himself, he slapped Rani. She fell down with the acid bottle. The appellant explained that because of that, she might have suffered acid burn injuries. He also stated that out of fear of his own safety, he left the spot. The appellant even admitted having purchased acid from the shop of PW 25 Inderjit Singh, but he explained that it was purchased at the instance of deceased Rani on 17.05.1992 and not on 15.05.1992 as projected by the prosecution. Regarding the recovery of clothes i.e. pant Ex.P-11 and T-Shirt Ex.P-10 at his instance, he has admitted that he went to the houses of Gurcharan Singh at Khayala and Dalip Singh at Baljeet Nagar with the police, but according to him, the clothes were not recovered at his instance, though he admitted that the pant and T-Shirt Exhibits P-11 and P-10 belong to him.
11. In view of the above explanation given by the accused in answer to the incriminating evidence put to him, the only issue for Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 6 of 19 determination in the instant appeal is whether the deceased Rani suffered fatal acid burn injuries incidentally, as explained by the appellant, or it was homicidal?
12. We may notice that the motive behind the incident is that the appellant was obsessed with the deceased and when she declined to accept his offer of marriage, he got frustrated and poured acid over her. This fact is also admitted by the appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
13. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the instant case the conviction of the appellant is mainly based upon the purported dying declaration Ex.PW22/A of the deceased. He has pointed out that the prosecution has sought to prove that she made the dying declaration in presence of the Investigating Officer, SI Babu Ram when he examined her at DDU Hospital and also she made dying declaration in presence of her parents PW1 Ram Narayan and PW2 Phuleshwari Devi.
14. It was argued on behalf of the appellant that the dying declaration Ex.PW22/A allegedly made in presence of SI Babu Ram is not reliable because the deceased, as per the MLC Ex.PW21/A, had suffered 60% acid burns on her body, including the face and the lips, which makes it improbable that she would have been in a position to speak to make a dying declaration, that too a prolix one. He has drawn our attention to the testimony of PW16 Surinder Kumar, who stated Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 7 of 19 that the deceased was unable to speak because of the serious burn injuries over her face, body arms and lips. He has also pointed out that DDU Hospital admittedly could not handle the deceased and referred her to the RML Hospital. Therefore, it is highly improbable that the deceased could have given a prolix dying declaration Ex.PW22/A to the Investigating Officer, SI Babu Ram. Learned counsel further submitted that as per the testimony of PW29 Dr. Shishank Chaudhary, who was Junior Resident Doctor in Surgical Emergency, RML Hospital, Delhi, the patient Rani was unable to speak so as to disclose her parentage and address. It was argued that the doubt against the authenticity of dying declaration Ex.PW22/A is further compounded by the fact that the Investigating Officer has admittedly obtained the impression of the big toe of the deceased on the dying declaration, whereas perusal of MLC Ex.PW21/A of the deceased shows that the deceased had appended her right as well as left thumb impressions thereon. From this, learned counsel for the appellant has urged us to infer that the dying declaration is a fabricated document, otherwise there was no reason for the Investigating Officer for taking big toe impression instead of thumb impression of the deceased on the dying declaration. Besides aforesaid circumstances, it is submitted that the dying declaration Ex.PW22/A ought to be rejected as there is no independent corroboration of the dying declaration.
15. On perusal of the MLC Ex.PW21/A, it transpires that the deceased Rani was brought to DDU Hospital by Constable Atma Ram on 17.05.92 Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 8 of 19 at 6:10 PM. PW21, Dr. J.K. Tyagi, who examined the injured, has proved the MLC. He has further stated that on the same day, on the request of the Investigating Officer, he examined the patient and declared her fit for statement at about 6:30 PM. He has proved his endorsement to this effect on the MLC Ex.PW21/A as Ex.PW21/B. Therefore, we have no reason to doubt that the deceased was not fit for statement. According to PW22 SI Babu Ram, the Investigating Officer, he recorded the statement of injured Rani Ex.PW22/A in presence of Dr. A.K. Seth, the then CMO of the Hospital. Dr. A.K. Seth has appeared as PW23 and he has confirmed the aforesaid fact. Not only this, he has even attested the statement of Rani recorded by the Investigating Officer. Even PW26 Dr. V.K. Grover, who was the then Senior Resident Surgeon, DDU Hospital, has confirmed in his cross- examination that dying declaration of the deceased was recorded under the supervision of Dr. A.K. Seth. In view of the above overwhelming evidence, we have no reason to doubt that the statement Ex.PW22/A was not made by the injured Rani. On perusal of the record, we find no reason as to why the above witnesses i.e. PW22, SI Babu Ram, PW21, Dr. J.K. Tyagi, PW23, Dr. A.K. Seth and PW26 Dr. V.K. Grover would join hands to create a false dying declaration with a view to implicate the appellant, with whom they have no axe to grind.
16. Another question raised for consideration is as to why instead of thumb impression of the deceased, her big toe impression was taken on the statement Ex.PW22/A? In our view, aforesaid infirmity, if at all Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 9 of 19 it can be termed as infirmity, is no help to the appellant because if the thumb impression of the deceased on the MLC is closely seen, then it appears that there was some injury on the thumbs of the deceased. Sulphuric acid is a corrosive material and once it falls on the body of a person, it seeps into the portion of body around the point of contact with the passage of time and affects a larger area of the body. Therefore, it is not surprising that by 6:30 PM, reaction of acid had caused burns on the thumbs of the deceased due to reaction of sulphuric acid. As such the Investigating Officer deemed it appropriate to obtain big toe impression of the deceased on the dying declaration Ex.PW22/A just to eliminate any doubt about the identity of the person who had made the statement.
17. Learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that even if it is taken that the deceased Rani did make the statement in presence of Investigating Officer, then also it is difficult to expect that she was in a fit state of mind to make a clear and concise statement. Expanding on the argument, he has submitted that generally in cases like acid burns, which cause severe pain and burning sensation to the victim, they are administered sedatives to ease their trauma. Those sedatives have a tendency to impact the brain function of the patient and within a few minutes of administration of the medicine, the patient goes into stupor. He argued, obviously, in this case also, Rani must have been administered the sedatives like Pathedene etc. by 6:30PM, therefore when the Investigating Officer reached at the hospital, she could not Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 10 of 19 have been in a fit state of mind to make the statement. We do not find any merit in this contention because had that been the case, Dr. J.K. Tyagi, PW21 would not have declared the patient fit for statement. Even Dr. A.K. Seth, PW23, in whose presence and under whose supervision the dying declaration was recorded, would not have permitted the recording of said statement.
18. Next submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the prosecution has failed to prove the purchase of acid by the appellant. In support of this contention, he has pointed that the shopkeeper Inderjit Singh, PW25 could not identify the appellant in his testimony. In the alternative, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that even if it is assumed that the appellant had gone to the shop of PW25, Inderjit Singh, then also from the cross-examination of PW9 Constable Satbir Singh it appears that on enquiry by the Investigating Officer, the shopkeeper had told him that when the appellant went to purchase acid from his shop, he was accompanied by one girl. This suggestion in itself, in our view, indicates that the appellant did purchase the acid bottle from the shop. This conclusion also finds support from the admission of the appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in answer to Q. No.19, wherein he stated that "so far as purchase of acid is concerned, the same was purchased on 17.05.92 itself at the instance of Rani, along with Rani". From the aforesaid reply, it stands proved on record that the appellant had purchased the acid from the shop of PW25, Inderjit Singh. His only reservation is that Rani Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 11 of 19 (deceased) was along with him and the acid was purchased on 17.05.92.
19. Next submission on behalf of the appellant is that the case of the prosecution is that the appellant poured sulphuric acid on the body of the deceased. Whereas, as per the testimony of the Investigating Officer, a bottle with some black coloured liquid was recovered at the spot. He has submitted that sulphuric acid, as per testimony of PW25 Inderjit Singh, is a yellow colour liquid. Therefore, the theory of prosecution of pouring sulphuric acid on the deceased by the appellant is belied. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant, in our considered view, is devoid of merit. The bottle along with the black coloured liquid was sent to CFSL for chemical analysis and as per the CFSL Report Ex.PW-7/L-1, the black coloured liquid contained in the bottle did give positive tests for sulphuric acid. Thus, there can be no doubt that sulphuric acid was actually used in the incident. Otherwise also, in view of defence taken by the appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the acid was actually used. According to him, Rani tried to throw acid upon him and when he slapped her, she fell down and sustained acid burn injuries.
20. Next contention on behalf of the appellant is that the prosecution has not been able to prove the recovery of his pant and T-Shirt Exhibits P-11 and P-10 beyond reasonable doubt. In this regard also, it is noticed from the statement of the appellant that he has admitted Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 12 of 19 having led the police party to the houses of Gurcharan Singh at Khayala and his uncle Dalip Singh, PW11 at Baljeet Nagar from where his T-Shirt Ex.P-10 and pant Ex.P-11, both having acid burns were recovered respectively. His only explanation is that the Police has planted those pants and shirts, though in answer to Q. No.38 in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he admitted that the T-Shirt Ex.P- 10 and the pant Ex.P-11 belong to him. He has not explained as to why and when those clothes were burnt due to acid. Therefore, in our view, the learned Trial Court was right in concluding that his pant and T-Shirt sustained acid burns in the occurrence. Otherwise also, the appellant, as per his defence, has admitted his presence at the time of occurrence and he has also admitted that he had sustained the burn injuries in the occurrence, therefore, the issue of recovery of acid burnt clothes of the appellant has lost its significance.
21. Now the question arises, whether the occurrence took place in the manner as projected by the prosecution or in the manner as projected by the appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.? The explanation of the appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is that deceased Rani was afraid that her career may not be marred in the event of the appellant disclosing her secrets. Therefore, she threw acid from the bottle upon him and in order to save himself, the appellant slapped the deceased, as a result of which she fell along with acid bottle and in the process might have sustained the burn injuries.
Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 13 of 19
22. In our view, the defence of the appellant is not plausible. If the occurrence had happened in the manner as projected by the appellant, then the deceased Rani had fallen along with the acid bottle and in that eventuality, unless the bottle had broken, much acid could not have flown out of the narrow mouth of the bottle, so as to cause 60% burn injuries to the deceased. As per evidence on record, the bottle with some acid was seized intact from the spot. This circumstance itself makes the explanation of the appellant improbable. Further, it has come in evidence that the appellant ran away from the spot after the occurrence after bolting and locking the deceased inside the room. The fact that the appellant escaped from the spot is established from the testimony of PW8 Kashmir Singh, three-wheeler driver who stated that he knew the accused, who was resident of WZ-112, Sant Nagar, Tilak Nagar and on 17.05.92, he met the appellant near his house. The appellant was having acid burn injuries on his hands and he told him that he was to go to a Doctor. Thereafter, he took the appellant in his three-wheeler scooter and the appellant alighted from his scooter at Khayala and went away. There is no explanation of the appellant on record as to which Doctor he had gone to for treatment and what history he gave about his burn injuries. It is pertinent to note that he had alighted from the three-wheeler scooter at Khayala where Gurcharan Singh was residing and from his house, the T-Shirt of the appellant with acid burns Ex.P-10 was recovered. This points towards the guilty conduct of the appellant. Not only this, he had left the Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 14 of 19 injured Rani locked in the room. It was argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the locking of Rani in the room has not been proved because PW7, Subhash and PW16 Surinder Kumar, who were examined by the prosecution to prove this fact have not supported the case of prosecution and according to their version, they found Rani in a badly burnt condition in front of the house of the appellant. Both these witnesses were cross-examined by the learned APP and they denied the suggestion that they took out the girl from the room after breaking open the lock and the kunda. It is interesting to note that PW7 Subhash, in his zeal to come to the rescue of the appellant, volunteered during his cross-examination by the learned APP that the Police had kept the lock there at the spot and got it photographed. Whereas, PW16 Surinder Kumar in his cross-examination by the learned APP volunteered his opinion that the door of the room of the accused was made of an iron-sheet and kunda of the said door could not be separated. If the witnesses, for the reasons best known to them, have opted not to support the case of the prosecution, that by itself, in our view, is no reason to reject the testimony of police witnesses. PW22, SI Babu Ram is categorical in his testimony that when he reached at the spot, one lock make Nelson and kunda were lying outside the house No.WZ-112, Sant Nagar, Tilak Nagar and those were taken into possession by him after converting them into sealed packets vide memo Ex.PW22/D. PW28, Constable Atma Ram has also corroborated his version. We find no reason why these two witnesses Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 15 of 19 would try to create false evidence against the appellant, particularly when no family member of the deceased was present at that time nor they had any axe to grind with the appellant. Thus, in our view, the learned Trial Court has rightly believed the prosecution evidence to the effect that the deceased was taken out of the room after breaking open the kunda of the door, which was obviously locked from outside by the appellant while going away from the spot.
23. In view of the discussion above, we do not find any reason to suspect the veracity of the dying declaration of the deceased Ex.PW22/A and we are of the view that the learned trial Judge has rightly relied upon the same. In the matter of Manu Raja Vs. State of MP, AIR 1976 SC 2199, it was held by the Supreme Court that it is neither a rule of law nor of prudence that a dying declaration cannot be acted upon without corroboration. In Narain Singh & Anr. Vs State of Haryana, AIR 2004 SC 1616, it was held that the dying declaration, if found reliable, can form basis of conviction. In the instant case, from the evidence on record, we do not find any reason to suspect the reliability of the dying declaration Ex.PW22/A. Therefore, in our considered view, the learned Trial Court has rightly found the appellant guilty of pouring acid on the deceased.
24. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that from the facts of the case, if those are taken to be true, it is apparent that the appellant committed the act of pouring acid on the deceased Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 16 of 19 in the heat of passion without any intention to kill her. At best the intention of the appellant was only to deface the deceased to make her incapable of marrying anyone else as she was not ready to marry him. Thus, he has urged us to conclude that her case falls within 4th Exception to Section 300 IPC. As such the conviction under Section 302 IPC is not justified and it should have been under Section 304 Part I IPC. In support of this contention, he has relied upon the judgments in Vineet Kumar Chauhan Vs State of Uttar Pradesh, (2007) 14 SCC 660, Ruli Ram & Anr. Vs State of Haryana, (2002) 7 SCC 691, Jagat Singh Vs State of Haryana, (1977) 1 SCC 225, Dharman Vs State of Punjab, AIR 1957 SC 324: 1957 Crl.LJ 420, Basdev Vs State of PEPSU, 1956 SCR 363: AIR 1956 SC 488: 1956 Crl.LJ 919 (2), Chamru, Son of Budhwa Vs State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 652: 1954 Crl.LJ 1676, Rajinder Vs. State of Haryana, (2006) 5 SCC 425 and State of UP Vs Jodha Singh & Ors, (1989) 3 SCC 465.
25. In order to appreciate the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, we deem it necessary to have a look at 4th Exception to Section 300, which is reproduced thus:
"Section 300. Murder
-----
-----
Exception 4-Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offenders having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner."
------
------Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 17 of 19
26. A plain reading of the above provision shows that in order to take advantage of above Exception, the appellant is required to show that the act committed by him was without any pre-meditation in a sudden fight, it was committed in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and the appellant had not taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.
27. Perusal of the dying declaration Ex.PW22/A shows that the appellant had called the deceased to his room on the pretext of discussing a dance programme offer. He asked the deceased to marry him and threatened that in the event of her refusal, he would finish her and when the deceased declined the offer, he poured acid upon her from a bottle which he had procured earlier. From the above sequence of events, it is obvious that that the appellant had not only acted in a pre-meditated manner, but he had also acted in a cruel manner. Not only this, he had acted in a cruel manner because even if the deceased, by the grace of God had survived, her life would have been ruined because of de-figuration due to corrosive action of the acid. Therefore, in our considered view, the aforesaid heinous act committed by the appellant does not fulfil even a single requirement of 4th Exception to Section 300 IPC. We have gone through the judgments cited by learned counsel for the appellant and, in our considered view, all those judgments are based upon their own peculiar facts and the factual matrix distinct from the facts of this case. Thus, we find no Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 18 of 19 reason to extend the benefit of 4th Exception to Section 300 to the appellant.
28. In view of the above discussion, we find no infirmity in the impugned judgment. The learned Trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC. Therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.
29. The appeal is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed.
30. The appellant is on bail. His bail bond and surety stand cancelled. We direct the appellant to be taken into custody and sent to Jail to undergo remaining period of his sentence.
AJIT BHARIHOKE, J.
NOVEMBER 03, 2009 SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
pst
Crl.A.No.218/1994 Page 19 of 19